The appellant imported stainless steel sheets under a concessional S.R.O. 844(1)198, dated 23-7- 1998. According to that S:R.O. the imported material was to be used for the manufacture of goods to be exported out of Pakistan within a period of six months. The appellants, however, made a request for extension in time as provided for in the said S.R.O. It was allowed by the Assistant Collector Customs (Bonds) Dryport, Lahore on 27-6-2000 after obtaining the approval of Additional Collector of Customs, Lahore: Subsequently, however, the Collector of Customs, Lahore re- opened the case in terms of section 195 of the Customs Act,1969 and set aside the order of the .Assistant Collector on the ground that he was not competent to grant extension.-
2. On first appeal learned Tribunal found for the appellant. It was noted that there was no ,mention of the officer competent to grant extension in rule 4 of the said S.R.O. Secondly, that even it' the extension was to be granted by the Collector, it was for the departmental officers to seek his approval as the appellant had approached them explaining due reasons for his claim for extension.. Thirdly, according to the learned Tribunal under the Customs Law the date of import was the date of filing of bill of entry and not the date of manifest which was taken into consideration by the Collector while exercising his powers under section 195 of the Act.
3. While concluding, the learned Tribunal, however, allowed the appellant to make export of the goods manufactures from the material imported under the said S.R.O. within a period of one month from the date of receipt of their order. That portion of direction grieved the appellant.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the patties we are persuaded to allow the contention made at the bar by the appellant that the Tribunal after having found for them ought to have allowed same time as provided for in the S.R.O. for the export of the goods. On consideration of various facts and on the contention that a mistake on the part of the Court should prejudice no one we will hold that the extended period of six months shall be taken from 28-8-2001, the date on which the order of the Tribunal was dispatched to the appellant.
5. Appeal allowed in the above terms.